Hi Richard,

On 9/24/19 11:11 AM, [email protected] wrote:
From: Richard Röjfors <[email protected]>

It seems like the CREG reporting from the L2 modems are quite
buggy. An example for a L210 where CREG reports UTRAN while
COPS and UREG reports LTE. A manual poll also indicates LTE.

I also found that the technology mapping was incorrect,
probably confused with enum packet_bearer.

A commented log showing where CREG is not trustable:

UREG indicates LTE
21:59:29 : < \r\n+UREG: 7\r\n
21:59:29 : < \r\n+CIEV: 9,2\r\n
21:59:29 : < \r\n+CGEV: NW MODIFY 1,0,0\r\n
21:59:31 : < \r\n+CIEV: 2,2\r\n
21:59:39 : < \r\n+CIEV: 2,3\r\n
21:59:44 : < \r\n+CIEV: 2,2\r\n
22:01:38 : < \r\n+CIEV: 2,3\r\n
22:01:43 : < \r\n+CIEV: 2,2\r\n

A CREG indicating UTRAN with HSDPA and HSUPA
22:29:39 : < \r\n+CREG: 5,"0000","00000000",6\r\n
22:29:39 : > AT\r
22:29:39 : < \r\nOK\r\n
22:29:39 : > AT+COPS=3,2\r
22:29:39 : < \r\n+CIEV: 9,2\r\n
22:29:39 : < \r\nOK\r\n
22:29:39 : > AT+COPS?\r

An immediate cops indicating LTE
22:29:39 : < \r\n+COPS: 0,2,"24007",7\r\n
22:29:39 : < \r\nOK\r\n
22:29:39 : > AT+CSQ\r
22:29:39 : < \r\n+CIEV: 2,4\r\n
22:29:39 : < \r\n+CSQ: 26,4\r\n
22:29:39 : < \r\nOK\r\n
22:29:39 : > AT+CGATT=1\r
22:29:39 : < \r\nOK\r\n
22:29:39 : > AT+COPS=3,0\r
22:29:39 : < \r\nOK\r\n
22:29:39 : > AT+COPS?\r

Another cops also indicates LTE
22:29:39 : < \r\n+COPS: 0,0,"Tele2",7\r\n <- 7: LTE
22:29:39 : < \r\nOK\r\n
22:29:39 : > AT+CGREG?\r

CGREG indicates unknown -> normal on LTE
22:29:39 : < \r\n+CGREG: 2,4\r\n
22:29:39 : < \r\nOK\r\n
22:29:44 : < \r\n+CIEV: 9,2\r\n
22:29:46 : < \r\n+CIEV: 2,2\r\n
22:56:23 : < \r\n+CIEV: 2,3\r\n
22:56:28 : < \r\n+CIEV: 2,2\r\n
22:59:40 : < \r\n+CIEV: 2,4\r\n

Manual poll shows we are running LTE
at+creg?
+CREG: 2,5,"2AFC","01DB0206",7

OK
---
  drivers/ubloxmodem/network-registration.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++----
  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)


Applied, thanks.

Regards,
-Denis

_______________________________________________
ofono mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ofono.org/mailman/listinfo/ofono

Reply via email to